Legal Opinion

Lifton v. Harshman

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 16, 1949No. Civ. 16437PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.

This is the second appeal in an action for specific performance of a contract to convey real property.

Respondents having refused to consummate their agreement to sell an apartment house to appellant, he instituted this action for specific performance. An adverse judgment was reversed upon appellant’s first appeal with instructions to the trial court “to (2) take evidence upon the sole question of the loss and damage suffered by plaintiff as alleged ... (3) to include in its findings of fact a finding of the amount of damages suffered by plaintiff as shown by the evidence which the court is…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Lifton v. HarshmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  2. Abbott v. the 76 Land and Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Heinlen v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Coleman v. DawsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Jonas v. LelandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ellis v. MihelisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Greenstone v. Claretian Theological SeminaryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  3. Erich v. GranoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
  4. Dennis v. OverholtzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  5. Harrison-Daniels Co. v. AughtryCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1958

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API